Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

I agree that fights should be stopped once you get into this scenario.

Ron, so anything up to this point would be okay?

Hi Kevin,

Well, not really. I'd like to see the referee be required to stop a match with the successful demonstration of any of the following: full mount, any choke, arm bar, leg bar, heel hook or any triangle involving the head.

Further I'd ban completely any blows to the head of a kid taken to the mat. That includes fists, elbows or knees. No stomps to a downed opponent.

In general I would like to see a shift in attitude from winning at any cost to skillful application of a variety of techniques representative of the different arts that comprise MMA.

The UFC should really step up here and take the lead in establishing a strict set of rules governing kids training and competition in MMA. They are, after all, the premier organization in the sport and in an excellent position to dictate how kids should be trained and compete.

None of the aforementioned kid's sports permit beating on of a competitor who has been taken to the ground and "mounted". Nor do they permit choking, stomping upon a downed competitor or joint locks intended to submit a competitor.

Actually, in judo and bjj well before the age of 16 you can choke. Armbars in judo however require you to16. In bjj/sub grappling you can choke and armbar/kneebar/whatever at very young ages, but they also have positional only divisions and other restricted divisions for worried parents.

Again, I see no problem with sub grappling at any age. My biggest worry is at what age kids can disassociate anger and violence from striking. Punching someone hard in the face is a very life changing experience. I know many adults who can not disassociate hate, anger and wanting to kill from striking. They go into the ring hating their opponent and wanting to hurt him, not wanting to win a fight with good sportsmanship. I would think that young kids (under 16) would have the same problems. Now think of the emotional content of say sitting on someones chest and striking them. Think of the primal emotions that inspires. Now as adults we are able to overcome this (well most of us). We can see it is just a sport, we can compete and thank our opponent afterward. The question is at what age is it possible for people to do this, and if the child can not do this, is it healthy?

This has been a fascinating thread to watch evolve. It has made me sit back and think beyond my initial reactions to the posters before I felt settled enough to offer an opinion. I started in martial arts and fighting sports as a pre-teen, have coached and ref'ed sports beginning in my teens, am a parent, grandparent and have specialized training in child psychology This is the "backdrop" with which I view this topic (I am a big fan of MMA).

Violent competition is common with many male, species. Dominant, male position within animal groups is apparently an evolutionary process allowing the "best" male genes to replicate. Watch a discovery show, animal kingdom show,..... and the level of violence can be quite astounding. The human species has a long, storied history of violent interactions within and against other social groups. This supports the claim among some, that violence may be "hard-wired" from an evolutionary perspective, particularly in males.

Human's have "evolved" to the point where we can sublimate our violent urges in more socially-acceptable forms. That level of "disconnect" between the impulse and behavior has both positive and negative ramifications. Within our culture, we have such "wonderful" sublimated activities such as football, lacrosse, hockey, ..... Thirty years ago, basketball had very little physical contact involved. Look at the level of violent contact today.

Parents can easily delude themselves into thinking that it is okay for their "Johnny" to go out and render the opposing quarterback unable to continue to play, and not see themselves encouraging their child to be very violent. How many times have we seen little league parents fight, pop warner football parents yelling for their children to leave bodies on the ground, soccer parents to encourage their children to take out a good player. That seems to be more acceptable to the general public than a parent encouraging their child to win in a mma, judo, or karate match. We simply excuse this by saying that the parents are just "over-reacting."

There is a level of direct-connect between what a child learns in MMA, judo, karate,.... between violent acts and their consequences. A good teacher helps a child to understand that connection and the tremendous responsibility contained in that. My discomforts exist not in allowing children to participate in these arts and fighting sports. Well-regulated and supervised practice and competition can be a positive experience for children. My discomforts lie elsewhere.

1) I have a strong disagreement with those teachers and schools who "sell" what they are doing as teaching the children "conflict-resolution skills." This is a very common pitch in my community. I do not consider "selling" children the idea that the good resolution of conflict comes from the successful utilization of more efficient, effective and violent physical actions to be "ethical" responsible and honest. The skill sets learned are relevant to that particular fighting sport/art, with carryover to self-defense situations. Children, particularly young children (which is why I strongly object to martial arts programs for tots) are not cognitively capable of genuinely parceling out where stylized violence begins and ends. A good teacher can continuously reinforce the boundaries for children and the children to learn that.

2) My biggest concern has to do with the forces that young, developing bodies are exposed to. This applies to not only martial arts/fighting sports, but to football, baseball.... Today, parents are so concerned with creating uber-children. Children are pushed, prod, and trained a such young ages to excel in the sport chosen by the parent. Children's bodies (through late adolescence into early adulthood) are going through profound growth changes. In order for the body to allow that to happen, the bones and connective tissue tend to be softer than an adults body. A perfect example of this is that my 13 year old son is recovering from a fracture of his growth plate on the top of the tibia from having landing with stiff legs and knees after going off a small ski jump in a ski school. From an evolutionary perspective, the human species is growing in height and weight at quite a rapid pace. Parents are allowing their children to do weight training and young ages, protein supplements, hormones,..... pushing the body to it's growth limits. However, the bones and connective tissue are not hardening any earlier. The amount of rotator cuff injuries in preteens playing baseball have doctors aghast. The number of blown out knees from football in young children also has doctors worried. The pressures and torquing that these young bodies are receiving are significant and do carry with them consequences.

I would not be comfortable putting my children (and I did not) into the kinds of activities where in their latency years, their bodies would be subjected to high degrees of impacts, torques, strikes, ..... My youngest son (now 13) started karate when he was five. BUT, there was and is minimal sparring, which is highly controlled. The emphasis is on form and control. He is now also an Aikido student of mine. I do not teach the young children any significant torquing techniques. I teach Ikkyo, kote-gaeshi, and shiho-nage in a manner that relies on unbalancing the person and not excess torquing of a joint.

Strikes to the head, no matter how heavily padded the heads, hands and feet are, cause a particular movement of the brain inside the skull that is not desirable (look at Ali- The rope-a-dope, created a genuine neurological dope). I do not see any advantage of advocating frequent head banging at any age (does somebody believe that 100 headers a day with a young child in soccer is not causing the brain to bounce back and forth?). That is another concern when examining what I would want my child to be exposed to.

I have no problems with children being in these sports and arts, as long as there is some degree of responsible limits placed upon them. There is always in inherent risk in any aspect of life. Reasonable (what is reasonable is an unanswered question) amounts of torque, impact, aggression,... are not bad things, but good things that the body and person learns to grow from. This can range for developing good reflexes, core body strength, agility, control of ones own impulses,..... I find the artificial separation of how people choose to look at these activities to be somewhat disturbing. A parent would have no problem wanting to ban mma for children but not insist that their child wear a helmet skiing, biking, skateboarding.... That same parent might be proud of how hard their child decked another child on the football field.

We as parents, have a responsibility to make the important decisions as to what activities our children engage in, and are exposed to. Frankly, I am more comfortable with Kevin as a parent. He carefully limits the amount of violence that he child can watch, while allowing his child to train in a safe atmosphere in which violent acts are controlled and the sense of responsibility is always paramount.

Our societies "outrage" against MMA serves as a pathetic backdrop to our societies support of questionable wars, indifference towards starvation and mass murders/genocide in Africa (before that, eastern europe). We want to "protect" our children from being exposed to MMA while they can look at the papers and see dead bodies, go to the theatre and see a pg-13 movie with enough deaths to exceed both hands. Who are we kidding? At least the child who learns MMA, Judo, ..., has a direct experience between acts of violence and their consequences, what anger and fear does to one's own body and ability to think straight. Of course their are risks involved. Then again, so is stepping outside in the morning and getting the paper. Are we honest about those risks? MMA is not a sport where someone is going to be able to compete in for 20 years and not expect some permanent consequences. Heck, my wrestling, soccer, karate .... days still have daily reminders on my body that I cannot wish away. I do not regret those experiences, but everything does come with some cost.

I have spent my life as a parent, and now grandparent to help educate my children to be able to weight decisions based upon some analysis of benefit and cost. When they were young, those decisions were the responsibility of both my wife and I. As they aged, we helped them to look at how and why we made those choices (it was still not open to their choices in many areas), teaching them to hopefully make their own good choices in their lives. If I had a young child today, I would still not allow the child to take MMA, but NOT because I believed that it was unnaturally violent or taught children to be violent. My choice is based upon my life experiences and concerns about healthy physical development. Another parent might view that differently and I respect that decision as well. The only decisions I would not support, would be based upon wanting a child to be the most effective, efficient instrument of violence that a parent could aspire in that child. That has NOTHING to do with training in MMA.

It is disheartening all the violence in the world. We as parents all have a choice. We can act like animals, or not. We can teach our kids to be animals or not. If it is believed that we "hard-wired" for violence then how do you explain those men such as O'Sensei? How do we explain kids who don't want anything to do with violence? On the other hand, how do we explain parents making and turning their kids violent. The film, "Heavy Metal Jacket" really dealt well with how you turn someone violent. Those kids who do become violent we treat them differently in society. They get help to deal with their violent behavior or they become punished, or both. Even though society loves violence, we don't tolerate it from kids. The crazy thing is that society greatly influences kids with drowning them in violent forms of films, books, games, and TV.

All the great and powerful warring societies knew to be effective in making a warrior you had to condition the kids early to be warriors from an early age. Japan was a great example of that. Throw in Sparta too. There are lots of examples of that in countries today too. Then they become adults influence society to continue acceptance of violence and the cycle of violence continues. Water it down to tolerant levels and Volia! There you have it our modern culture of contact sports.

I don't think humans are like swine. Where in one or two generations apart from domestication, the animal turns feral. That to me is "hard-wired." We can be conditioned for violence from a very early age.

I agree it is hypocritical to have parents support that and reject MMA. But MMA is real, not choreographed like pro-wrestling, it isn't football, and it isn't hockey. There are many parents in society who don't have their heads screwed on right. A reason I don't think we need MMA for kids, either.

However screwed up some parents are as parents, or one-sided the media is against MMA for kids, or MMA, the majority of society as it stands now is against MMA for kids as it is.

For society to be more accepting of MMA even though it loves violence, MMA has to have bigger paydays, and a Don King. It would also have to change it rules some more to eliminate blood, and have a point worthy of a virtual violent society besides beating the other guy bloody. Maybe there needs to be a ball thrown in and a goal of some sort.

I don't think society needs another contact sport for kids. There is no good reason why kids shouldn't wait until adulthood. Each parent who wants their kids in MMA should realize they face an uphill battle, unless things change to fit society. Denial of this fact isn’t going to change things as they are now.

You can wish all you want, but we simply are animals. Much of us is genetically setup and hardwired in. All of your hopes and attempts at conditioning will not rewire what we were born with. At best, we can make adaptations to the base. O'Sensei changed significantly over his lifetime- adaptation to the base.

We all maintain the right the guide our children in the directions we think are best for your children. For you, MMA is not right for your children and I respect that decision. I would not respect it if you wanted to impose that decision on everybody else.

All the great and powerful warring societies knew to be effective in making a warrior you had to condition the kids early to be warriors from an early age. Japan was a great example of that. Throw in Sparta too. There are lots of examples of that in countries today too. Then they become adults influence society to continue acceptance of violence and the cycle of violence continues. Water it down to tolerant levels and Volia! There you have it our modern culture of contact sports.

So is not aikido a watered down form of violence? What makes it any diferent from modern contact sports?

Quote:

I agree it is hypocritical to have parents support that and reject MMA. But MMA is real, not choreographed like pro-wrestling, it isn't football, and it isn't hocke

so I would imply that from this that you consider that Pro-wrestling is Okay because it is "not real"?

I have issues with what pro wrestling represents. I have no issue with my son watching UFC. I do have issue with him watching pro wrestling with all the anger, and deception, and violence that it represents real or unreal.

Quote:

However screwed up some parents are as parents, or one-sided the media is against MMA for kids, or MMA, the majority of society as it stands now is against MMA for kids as it is.

As screwed up as some parents may seem, and I agree there are many that don't hold the same values that I do. The U.S. is founded on personal liberties that allow them to be as screwed up as they want to be. I don't believe it is up to us to impose our own sense of values or beliefs.

The only argument that i think you can present is one based on harm. That is, demonstrate that a harm is being done to someone by another. It can be physcial or mental.

If harm is not being done, then government does not have the right to interfere.

No one has presented an argument that holds water based on harm. No studies showing that MMA activities are more or less dangerous than other contact sports.

You can wish all you want, but we simply are animals. Much of us is genetically setup and hardwired in. All of your hopes and attempts at conditioning will not rewire what we were born with. At best, we can make adaptations to the base. O'Sensei changed significantly over his lifetime- adaptation to the base.

We all maintain the right the guide our children in the directions we think are best for your children. For you, MMA is not right for your children and I respect that decision. I would not respect it if you wanted to impose that decision on everybody else.

Marc Abrams

It isn't important to me to debate to terms and labels. We are all living creatures. What was saying is that we have a choice in our behavior. We can act like animals, or regress to our animal behavior, or we don't. We don't have to be violent. There are people who are born more violent then others. Some people change over time or quickly to one side or the other. We don't need to teach our kids violence to exist, like an animal fighting over mating rights, or fighting off other males in a marked territory. Humans are able to function differently.

We think we have that right. It isn't true. I don't know who would say it is a right to teach their kids to be cannibals. I don't know who would agree that we should work our kids in coal mines 12-15 hr. days. Take racism as an example too. Laws direct us toward what society expects. We do live in a society.

People who want to put their kids in MMA should not expect the red carpet treatment. These parents should be prepared for the reality that society isn't going to be happy with MMA for kids.

I asked a question that hasn't been answered. It is a question in my mind that needs to be answered. Critical above any of the rhetoric said here in support of kids doing MMA. I understand why the question of why kids can’t wait until they are 18 has not been answered.

I can’t really respect any parent’s decision to place their kids in harms way. To pit kids against each other in a violent match, for all the obvious reasons. I don’t know any good reason for MMA for kids, do we really need something even more designed for pitting kids against each other in a modern gladiator contest. Really, to do that is for the parent(s). It is not fair to say you don't respect parents who will not put their kids in harms way. It isn't fair not to respect parents who argue we have way too much violent stimulus, and violent sports influencing kids already. Who these are they looking out for that don't support MMA for kids, or another violent contact sport?

We need to really need to stress the positive influences and stimulus in kids lives.

I was reading a current MMA magazine. I do follow it like many other people. I read that Elitexc and Elitepro both being MMA entertainment companies are pushing MMA for kids in Los Angeles, CA. school systems in inner-cities, and disadvantage youths. The marketing campaign is to use Bobby Jones and new sign of either being Lombar or Alverez to promote MMA to kids in school. From what I read, they want kids to start young to pool new fighters. Some of the rhetoric is it gives kids a way out of the ghetto. You think kids in the ghettos experience enough violence, then having MMA brough into the schools. Yea, Boxing did wonders for Mike Tyson's criminal record. It kept him out of trouble.

EliteXC (EliteXC and CBS are doing the MMA on primetime) and ElitePro are behind this, do I need to say more.

From what I read, they want kids to start young to pool new fighters. Some of the rhetoric is it gives kids a way out of the ghetto. You think kids in the ghettos experience enough violence, then having MMA brough into the schools. Yea, Boxing did wonders for Mike Tyson's criminal record. It kept him out of trouble.

Do you know what magazine and issue this was from?

As for Mike Tyson, I don't think Boxing as... a 'martial art' led to his criminal record. If I recall correctly Cus D'Amato was a very strong father figure in his life and his death possibly may have contributed to what led to Tyson's criminal record. Other possible speculations are boxing organizations, his later manager, and his own personal decisions. Or some combination of the above.

So are you stating that boxing or MMA is a possibility of making children commit criminal acts in the future? Or the organizations that run them? What about bad managers/coaches?

I know of one particular individual who I believe has started training at a relatively early age. (Maybe not as a kid, but probably in his early teen years.) From what I've seen he is quite honestly one of the most polite, gentlemen I've ever had the pleasure of meeting.

Some of the rhetoric is it gives kids a way out of the ghetto. You think kids in the ghettos experience enough violence, then having MMA brough into the schools. Yea, Boxing did wonders for Mike Tyson's criminal record. It kept him out of trouble.

False Correalation I believe. If it were true, then you'd see a direct porportion of crime linked to inner city boxing programs. Actually I think you'd see the exact opposite. Any program that provides kids leadership, purpose, meaning, and structure are good. Nothing unique about boxing I think, simply that it gives kids something that they can connect too.

Along that logic, we should close down Seven Eleven Stores as they seem to cause a great deal of robberies.

Again, you seem to equate MMA to violence, which is certainly an opinion you are entitled too, not one everyone shares.

As for Mike Tyson, I don't think Boxing as... a 'martial art' led to his criminal record. If I recall correctly Cus D'Amato was a very strong father figure in his life and his death possibly may have contributed to what led to Tyson's criminal record. Other possible speculations are boxing organizations, his later manager, and his own personal decisions. Or some combination of the above.

Whatever happened to the idea of personal responsibility?

I think Mike Tyson, and his decisions alone are responsible for his criminal record. If D'Amato was a "father figure" then Mike not only dishonored and disgraced himself, the organizations, and the sport he represented, he also disrespected D'Amato his legacy and his memory, by his actions. Tyson's behavior was shameful.

I think MMA is violent. You are correct, and I agree it is my opinion. Some are more tolerant of violence, their bar for what is violent and what isn't is lower due to over saturation. My bar is high. Especially for kids it is even higherr. Kids don't need to see violence too much of it and too graphic, does effect kids.

My kids and their younger cousins are disturbed by what they see in a MMA fight. All the blood and violence disturbs them, they don't like watching it. I can't help to think what young kid wouldn't be bothered by watching it. I can't help to think what type of teenager would be excited by watching it.

Now CBS and EliteXC put more rules in place to make their fights less brutal, more palatable to the audience. In this case if no blood is drawn, like many boxing matches, then maybe more kids and teenagers will watch it. Or at least make it more kid friendly. That is what is disturbing to me also, the pandering it to a younger audience.

We know why they are maketing it to kids, $$$$$$. If CBS looking to cash in, is successful in toning the violence down to make it tolerable for kids and parents, say PG-13 then you will see toy action MMA figures for pre-teen kids. And other merchandise as well to all age groups of kids. If MMA takes to primetime, then the EliteXC then is building a greater pool to feed the MMA industry that will keep EliteXC in money.

I think Mike Tyson, and his decisions alone are responsible for his criminal record. If D'Amato was a "father figure" then Mike not only dishonored and disgraced himself, the organizations, and the sport he represented, he also disrespected D'Amato his legacy and his memory, by his actions. Tyson's behavior was shameful.

Al Gtz.

I don't remember the magazine, I read it on the racks yesterday amoung all the other ones. I read at least about 4.

My Tyson comment. Boxing has long unofficially said it is a way out for kids. Maybe in the 1930s it was. Boxing didn't do good by Mike Tyson. He was exploited, and he didn't escape his troubled youth.

Basically, what I am saying MMA isn't really a way out for kids as they promote. The true way out is education. We don't want kids dropping out of highschool because of MMA dreams. It would be better if they finish highschool and got a college degree first. Look at Chuck Liddell, educated first, didn't do MMA as a kid, and he is a top MMA fighter. And if the dream doesn't work, then they have something to fall back on. It isn't fair to the kids or society other sports already do that.

I am not against MMA. I am a fan. I watch it. I have mixed feelings about it.

What I am against is MMA for kids. I see no reason why kids can't wait until they are adults.

Kids are saturated with violence all around them, it is acceptable and the media keeps pushing the envelope. Kids can be expose to violence early on, and their is no restriction to age. Kids can watch a graphic brutal, bloody, high intentsity fight on TV almost at birth. On the other hand kids are not allowed to watch explicted sexual content of an equal graphic nature like that of a MMA fight. We work to prevent out kids from having sex too young, but we allow them to participate in violent sports and activities.
Yes, I pulled the sex card.

I don't think kids really need to have sex as kids or do violent sports; MMA included until they are adults.

If Joe MMA wants to put his kids in MMA fine. It isn't against the law. I can't debate that, it's his kids. It is a different story when you pander it to everyone's kids, especially those kids who don't come from good homes or in a ghetto who may have God awful parents that don't care about their kids because of drug use or other illegal street activity. That is why EliteXC and ElitePro are targeting low income populated public schools. These kids are more suspectable to the MMA marketing, advertising and commerical recruiting going at school! Especially when the companies tell them it is a way out. That is the problem. Not adult MMA.

No issue with your position, especiallly as it relates to your own children. I think you and I agree on an individual level concerning what is right and appropriate for our own children. I make many of the same choices you do for mine. In fact, my 8 year old was asking to watch the Indiania Jones movies yesterday. I discussed it with my wife, and he is not ready for them. Another 8 year old might be, but not my son and in my family.

does not mean that I think they should be banned on promote violence or will lead to kids to create acts of violence. Certainly over exposure to constant violence without mindfullness is not healthy. I can't remember how many simulated and real acts of violence the average kid is exposed to, but I agree, it is way too many.

My issue is not with your personal choice, just not equating categorically things like boxing into that category for all.

Same with MMA done and trained properly.

I think they can serve as good links to help our children understand the power of violence and what it really means to use it.

We can't shelter our kids from it.

I am more prone to let my kid (in moderation) participate in martial arts in a gentle and guided fashion and explore this human element...rather than sit in an observer mode and watch it or play it in a video game.

But that is all you do. You use labels like "violent" and "MMA" and "society" and "kids". Then, as Kevin said, you use emotional arguements, not logical ones, to present your opinion as the "high ground" (oops, another label). Some (or many) of us just don't buy it.

Quote:

I asked a question that hasn't been answered. It is a question in my mind that needs to be answered. Critical above any of the rhetoric said here in support of kids doing MMA. I understand why the question of why kids can’t wait until they are 18 has not been answered.

Asked...and answered...

Quote:

I'm sure many have, and many will. Most of the top competitors in MMA either wrestled, boxed, did TMA, or some other contact sport in their youth. But just like there are jr. wrestling leagues through out the country, there may be jr. MMA leagues. Unless there is a convincing difference between the two, I can't see a logical reason not to have both for the families that choose to participate. Someone brought up a fireman's carry move earlier...I'd been doing that and having it done to me for years as a kid in wrestling. A similar waza exists in judo, and most forms of jujutsu. Kids have been doing [it] on their own in school yard fights for centuries.

Anyhoo, looks like Samurai Jack lives. Oh boy...

Best,
Ron (it shouldn't be hard for the admins on both boards to check the IPs involved)

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)

None of the aforementioned kid's sports permit beating on of a competitor who has been taken to the ground and "mounted". Nor do they permit choking, stomping upon a downed competitor or joint locks intended to submit a competitor.

Ugh.

Stomping is not allowed under the unified rules of MMA. It was allowed in Japan for several years yes, but nowdays it's not allowed there either. Everyone recognized that stomping (and soccer kicking, and up kicks to the head from the ground) take, well, not a whole lot of skill to pull off. So they were banned. You're much more likely to take serious crushing damage to your rib cage from kiddy football than you are in MMA.

Choking, as another poster has mentioned (and me myself mentioned repeatedly), is part of the pre-adult Judo syllabus, as well as joint locks like armbars. (I find the complaints about joint locking fascinating coming from Aikidoka).

Just because you're mounted doesn't mean that the fight is over if you're trained. I spent 15 minutes last night drilling escapes from being mounted. The body mechanics of that are not a whole lot different than Judo newaza or Wrestling. And if it's obvious that the mounted participant isn't able to defend himself, the referee immediately stops it before serious damage occurs. You'd know that if you watch MMA.

Ugh ugh UGH. I forgot why I gave up on this thread and made the mistake of wandering into this vortex of unfounded assumptions.

While I basically agree with your post, the sentence above caught my eye. It's not that aikidoka are against joint locks (that would be funny, wouldn't it), it's that scientific evidence suggests that growth plates in young bodies can be damaged by certain activities. Weight lifting at too young an age may be one of those activities. Joint locks when too young may be another. Most aikido programs for youth are VERY carefull in this area, so as not to cause harm to the participants.

But I agree, with the proper safety requirements (refs, work to position and securing the lock then tap, etc) there should be no real impact on MMA any more than in judo, wrestling, etc. I've seen some HORRIFIC accidents in wrestling (had my own shoulder seperated in college)...but I wouldn't ban that either.

Best,
Ron

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)

While I basically agree with your post, the sentence above caught my eye. It's not that aikidoka are against joint locks (that would be funny, wouldn't it), it's that scientific evidence suggests that growth plates in young bodies can be damaged by certain activities. Weight lifting at too young an age may be one of those activities. Joint locks when too young may be another. Most aikido programs for youth are VERY carefull in this area, so as not to cause harm to the participants.

Totally understood. The general sentiment is still odd to me though.

Quote:

But I agree, with the proper safety requirements (refs, work to position and securing the lock then tap, etc) there should be no real impact on MMA any more than in judo, wrestling, etc. I've seen some HORRIFIC accidents in wrestling...but I wouldn't ban that either.

Best,
Ron

To be honest, the only points in which I got close to seriously hurting myself in BJJ/MMA training was during the wrestling training (to those of you who don't know what I'm talking about, it's the same wrestling you find at a typical Middle/High school in the US), because the falls that one takes in drilling wrestling takedowns can be extremely awkward, fast, and don't lend themselves to Aikido/Judo ukemi easily.

To be honest, the only points in which I got close to seriously hurting myself in BJJ/MMA training was during the wrestling training (to those of you who don't know what I'm talking about, it's the same wrestling you find at a typical Middle/High school in the US), because the falls that one takes in drilling wrestling takedowns can be extremely awkward, fast, and don't lend themselves to Aikido/Judo ukemi easily.

Bingo...I've seen concussions, heard of damage to the spinal column, seen elbows completely hyperextended due to people reaching back as they fall...wrestling can be brutal...

Best,
Ron (and fun as all get out...but still brutal)

Ron Tisdale
-----------------------
"The higher a monkey climbs, the more you see of his behind."
St. Bonaventure (ca. 1221-1274)